Genetic Interaction Networks: Toward an Understanding of Heritability
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the relationship between the genotypes and phenotypes of individuals is key for identifying genetic variants responsible for disease and developing successful therapeutic strategies. Mapping the phenotypic effects of individual genetic variants and their combinations in human populations presents numerous practical and statistical challenges. However, model organisms, such as the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, provide an incredible set of molecular tools and advanced technologies that should be able to efficiently perform this task. In particular, large-scale genetic interaction screens in yeast and other model systems have revealed common properties of genetic interaction networks, many of which appear to be maintained over extensive evolutionary distances. Indeed, despite relatively low conservation of individual genes and their pairwise interactions, the overall topology of genetic interaction networks and the connections between broad biological processes may be similar in most organisms. Taking advantage of these general principles should provide a fundamental basis for mapping and predicting genetic interaction networks in humans.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it